GPS World

Tag: surveying

  • New DT Research tablets aimed at field professionals

    DT Research has released the DT395CR and DT395GS rugged tablets. While designed for field professionals, the tablets cost less than consumer-grade tablets over the lifetime of the product, DT Research said.

    The DT395GS rugged tablet by DT Research.
    The DT395GS rugged tablet by DT Research.

    Both DT395 tablets are highly durable to withstand extreme environments, designed with fully integrated options to eliminate easily broken attachments in mission-critical scenarios, and include security, privacy and productivity settings.

    The DT395GS tablet is designed for field applications with a high-accuracy GNSS module that is compatible with existing GIS software for mapping applications and brings together the advanced workflow for GIS data capture, accurate positioning and data transmission. The u-blox M8 GNSS module is capable of concurrent reception of GPS and GLONASS for up to 2-meter accuracy.

    “Many businesses have adopted mobile tablets with the goal of increasing productivity by leveraging the versatile tablet form-factor,” said Daw Tsai, president of DT Research. “But companies within construction, field service, logistics, manufacturing and warehousing have found that consumer-grade tablets are too fragile for their environment — requiring costly repairs and replacements that introduce expensive downtime. Our new DT395 rugged tablets give vertical industries exactly what they need with high reliability and lower TCO (total cost of ownership) over the lifetime of the product.”

    According to a VDC Research study, the average annual TCO of a ruggedized tablet is 22 percent lower than the average annual TCO of a non-rugged tablet. The study found average failure rates for non-rugged tablets is 15.2 percent compared to 6.9 percent for rugged tablets. Lost productivity, as a result of mobile device failure, was a leading contributor to higher TCO for non-rugged tablets. Mobile workers lost an average of 52-80 minutes of productivity when their mobile device failed. (Source: VDC Research, “Total Cost of Ownership Models for Mobile Computing and Wireless Platforms,” Third Edition.)

    Unlike consumer-grade tablets, the DT395CR and DT395GS ruggedized tablets are designed to be used in a variety of indoor and outdoor environments with full HD anti-reflection outdoor viewable displays. The tablets are IP65 and MIL-STD-810G rated to withstand 4-foot drops and extreme temperatures (-4° F to 140° F), and resist water, dust and humidity.

    “We tried iPads, but they were not suited for our environment,” said Marty Phillips, director of engineering at Murray Equipment, Inc. “Our customers do millions of dollars of fertilizer loading within an eight-week window in a broad range of weather conditions. If a remote control tablet is down for even an hour, it’s a significant revenue loss. We have used DT Research rugged tablets in our automated liquid-handling facilities across the U.S. for more than three years with no downtime or repair/replacement costs. The reliability of DT Research’s rugged tablets is unmatched.”

    Both the DT395CR and DT395GS have an 8.9-inch display with 1920 x 1200 resolution and capacitive touch, and weigh 2.87 pounds. The tablets run on an Intel Atom Quad Core CPU with 4GB RAM running Microsoft Windows 10 IoT Enterprise OS.

    Security, privacy and productivity settings

    “Security, privacy and productivity are a growing concern in many organizations,” Helen Fanucci, GM of Americas Device IoT Experience, Microsoft. “We are pleased to see DT Research utilize the Windows 10 IoT Enterprise-grade security to support mission-critical rugged tablets for customers and deliver a safer device experience, which enhances productivity for a variety of mobile scenarios in manufacturing, field service, logistics and other industries.”

    The DT395 tablets leverage advanced Windows 10 IoT Enterprise OS security including Device Guard, combining hardware and software security to lock down a device so that it can only run trusted applications. The DT395 also includes lock-down features to protect against malicious users while providing a custom-defined user experience.

    Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, and RFID can pose a security issue when using consumer-grade tablets within a business environment. DT Research DT395 rugged tablets can be purpose-built with a camera privacy mode and

    preconfigured with Bluetooth, RFID and Wi-Fi disable functions. The DT395 rugged tablets can also eliminate access to internet or social media applications to address productivity challenges.

    Customizable options

    DT Research offers customizable options for the DT395CR and DT395GS including an optimized OS and BIOS. Customers can choose to have the options below fully-integrated.

    • 3G WWAN or 4G LTE
    • 2D Barcode Scanner
    • Class 1 Bluetooth (1000 feet)
    • Camera (5 Megapixel back camera)
    • GNSS Module (u-blox M8)
    • HF/RFID 13.56MHz reader
    • HDMI-in and Ethernet port
    • Six-pin push/pull connector for EIA/RS-232/485/422, USB port and Ethernet port

  • DT Research delivers rugged tablets purpose-built for industry

    DT Research has released the DT395CR and DT395GS rugged tablets. While designed for field professionals, the tablets cost less than consumer-grade tablets over the lifetime of the product, DT Research said.

    The DT395GS rugged tablet by DT Research.
    The DT395GS rugged tablet by DT Research.

    Both DT395 tablets are highly durable to withstand extreme environments, designed with fully integrated options to eliminate easily broken attachments in mission-critical scenarios, and include security, privacy and productivity settings.

    The DT395GS tablet is designed for field applications with a high-accuracy GNSS module that is compatible with existing GIS software for mapping applications and brings together the advanced workflow for GIS data capture, accurate positioning and data transmission. The u-blox M8 GNSS module is capable of concurrent reception of GPS and GLONASS for up to 2-meter accuracy.

    “Many businesses have adopted mobile tablets with the goal of increasing productivity by leveraging the versatile tablet form-factor,” said Daw Tsai, president of DT Research. “But companies within construction, field service, logistics, manufacturing and warehousing have found that consumer-grade tablets are too fragile for their environment — requiring costly repairs and replacements that introduce expensive downtime. Our new DT395 rugged tablets give vertical industries exactly what they need with high reliability and lower TCO (total cost of ownership) over the lifetime of the product.”

    According to a VDC Research study, the average annual TCO of a ruggedized tablet is 22 percent lower than the average annual TCO of a non-rugged tablet. The study found average failure rates for non-rugged tablets is 15.2 percent compared to 6.9 percent for rugged tablets. Lost productivity, as a result of mobile device failure, was a leading contributor to higher TCO for non-rugged tablets. Mobile workers lost an average of 52-80 minutes of productivity when their mobile device failed. (Source: VDC Research, “Total Cost of Ownership Models for Mobile Computing and Wireless Platforms,” Third Edition.)

    Unlike consumer-grade tablets, the DT395CR and DT395GS ruggedized tablets are designed to be used in a variety of indoor and outdoor environments with full HD anti-reflection outdoor viewable displays. The tablets are IP65 and MIL-STD-810G rated to withstand 4-foot drops and extreme temperatures (-4° F to 140° F), and resist water, dust and humidity.

    “We tried iPads, but they were not suited for our environment,” said Marty Phillips, director of engineering at Murray Equipment, Inc. “Our customers do millions of dollars of fertilizer loading within an eight-week window in a broad range of weather conditions. If a remote control tablet is down for even an hour, it’s a significant revenue loss. We have used DT Research rugged tablets in our automated liquid-handling facilities across the U.S. for more than three years with no downtime or repair/replacement costs. The reliability of DT Research’s rugged tablets is unmatched.”

    Both the DT395CR and DT395GS have an 8.9-inch display with 1920 x 1200 resolution and capacitive touch, and weigh 2.87 pounds. The tablets run on an Intel Atom Quad Core CPU with 4GB RAM running Microsoft Windows 10 IoT Enterprise OS.

    Security, privacy and productivity settings

    “Security, privacy and productivity are a growing concern in many organizations,” Helen Fanucci, GM of Americas Device IoT Experience, Microsoft. “We are pleased to see DT Research utilize the Windows 10 IoT Enterprise-grade security to support mission-critical rugged tablets for customers and deliver a safer device experience, which enhances productivity for a variety of mobile scenarios in manufacturing, field service, logistics and other industries.”

    The DT395 tablets leverage advanced Windows 10 IoT Enterprise OS security including Device Guard, combining hardware and software security to lock down a device so that it can only run trusted applications. The DT395 also includes lock-down features to protect against malicious users while providing a custom-defined user experience.

    Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, and RFID can pose a security issue when using consumer-grade tablets within a business environment. DT Research DT395 rugged tablets can be purpose-built with a camera privacy mode and

    preconfigured with Bluetooth, RFID and Wi-Fi disable functions. The DT395 rugged tablets can also eliminate access to internet or social media applications to address productivity challenges.

    Customizable options

    DT Research offers customizable options for the DT395CR and DT395GS including an optimized OS and BIOS. Customers can choose to have the options below fully-integrated.

    • 3G WWAN or 4G LTE
    • 2D Barcode Scanner
    • Class 1 Bluetooth (1000 feet)
    • Camera (5 Megapixel back camera)
    • GNSS Module (u-blox M8)
    • HF/RFID 13.56MHz reader
    • HDMI-in and Ethernet port
    • Six-pin push/pull connector for EIA/RS-232/485/422, USB port and Ethernet port
  • GNSS coordinates as survey evidence — friend or foe?

    GNSS coordinates as survey evidence — friend or foe?

    In my last column in July, I shared the situation with U.S. federal lands in Alaska being surveyed with GNSS and subdivided by coordinates, instead of subdivided by traditional methods of setting monuments.

    The topic drew a varied range of responses and opinions. While some felt the article was on point with setting bad precedents, others added that it was time for technology to take over and not put so much priority on physical monuments.

    I do believe there is room for everyone at the table and would like to use this article as a follow up to more conversation. Let’s start with a comparison of monuments versus theoretical/published positions for parcel corners and land ownership.

    On the technical side

    Space – the final frontier. Everything these days has a spatial address and/or relationship. Thanks to the U.S. Department of Defense (and taxpayer’s money), the global positioning system was created. While originally designed for military use, the civilian application has opened up a new world of spatial technology.

    From Google Earth and municipal GIS to vehicular navigation and Pokemon Go, spatial data has expanded and tracked almost everything in our lives. Where’s the package from Amazon Prime? Let me check the app on my phone and it will show me where my wife’s shipment of make-up is via RFID chips on the box. Where are my buddies tonight? The “Find Friends” app tells me in seconds. All things spatial and right at your fingertips.

    So that brings us to surveying and how technology has influenced its historical methods. Coordinates aren’t new; the introduction to State Plane Coordinate Systems was developed and publicized by the U.S. Coastal & Geodetic Survey almost 100 years ago.

    First-order horizontal monument, U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, 1931.
    First-order horizontal monument, U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, 1931.

    This allowed for the creation of large networks to begin the framework of today’s GIS but not without its flaws. Instruments used for these measurements were very accurate but human error always played into the final computation. Positions established by observing Polaris and/or sun shots were somewhat accurate but often were too complicated for everyday surveying projects. For decades, the only projects in which state plane coordinates were utilized took place during larger state and federally funded surveys. Because of these limitations, use of state plane coordinates and networks didn’t have many followers.

    Forward a few decades and the invent of the electronic distance meter (EDM). Now there was technology available (albeit expensive) to measure large distances but it brought its own issues. Up to this point, surveyors didn’t need to worry about the earth’s curvature and atmospheric corrections but the EDM changed that.

    With the Eisenhower interstate highway system, more federally funded surveys were performed and surveyors were embracing state plane coordinates more than ever. Primitive GIS systems were starting to form but state and federal cartographers were the stewards of this data. Another big step was needed and the late 1970s/early 1980s didn’t disappoint.

    As mentioned earlier, the Department of Defense began implementation of the GPS network by sending a new breed of timing satellites into orbit beginning in the late 1970s. When decisions were made to allow civilians to receive GPS signals for positional use, a new era opened up for surveying. But just like route surveys, EDM’s and control networks, only large projects could sustain the funds necessary to utilize early GPS receivers. Over time, GPS equipment, like computers and software, became more advanced, user friendly and cost effective. Cost of entry to GPS technology became more affordable to most surveyors and expanded the capability of the profession to embrace state plane coordinates. For the surveyor community, the thought of an entire profession working within one large coordinate system was almost nirvana. It could help solve many of our ambiguity issues in comparing similar survey data. With today’s options of GPS networks, this dream is much closer to reality.

    In one of my previous articles, I shared my belief that the GNSS RTK network has been the single greatest improvement to the profession of surveying. The hard work put in by the National Geodetic Survey team in establishing and maintaining the National Spatial Reference System (NSRS) provides a thorough network that is confidently used nationwide and beyond. Additional Continuous Positional Reference Stations (CORS) are being installed nationwide and providing more surveyors with the network capability to perpetuate state plane coordinate systems literally anywhere. I, for one, like the idea of being able to share data with some certainty that most of my fellow surveyors are on the same datum.

    While the autonomous car may be several years out, the surveying community now has the tools to put all surveys and property corners on the same coordinate datum. Or do we?

    Every man’s house is his castle

    As a surveyor, the measurement of land has been the primary focus of my career and the biggest part of it has been the search and recovery of monuments. Other than family, a person’s home and/or real estate is their most prized and valued possession. Knowing where the limits of their ownership is very important; this is where the surveyor comes in and provides that knowledge. Establishing boundary limits with monuments is a critical role the surveyor performs; how do they get there?

    Monuments mean different things to everybody. Ask the person on the street what they define as a monument and they will most likely name the Washington Monument, Mt. Rushmore or another historical statue or building. History has a way with things and places being “monumental”. Here is Webster’s definition:

    Full definition of monument

    1. (obsolete): a burial vault: see sepulchre
    2. : a written legal document or record: see treatise
    3. a (1): a lasting evidence, reminder, or example of someone or something notable or great (2): a distinguished person
      b: a memorial stone or a building erected in remembrance of a person or event
    4. (archaic): an identifying mark: evidence; also: portent, sign
    5. (obsolete): a carved statue: see effigy
    6. a boundary or position marker (as a stone)
    7. see: national monument
    8. a written tribute

    Depending on what part of the world you are in, monuments of different sizes, shapes and materials are used for marking boundaries. Surveyors working westward after 1800 were setting hedge posts, large stones with pointed tops and stone mounds. It wasn’t until the Industrial Revolution with mass production of steel mills were iron bars and pipes used for setting section and property corners. The invention of the metal detector further increased the use of ferrous materials for corners and monuments by increasing the ability to recover the points at a later date. Over time, additional materials were introduced; brass tablets, steel reinforced rods, and stainless steel masonry nails being the most common.

    Typical property corner: 5/8-inch steel rod with ID cap (Illinois).

    Typical property corner: 5/8-inch steel rod with ID cap (Illinois).

    No matter what the material, points are set at appropriate locations to physically mark the intended corner. It is also the duty of the surveyor to inform the property owner of the results of the survey in order for parties being affected by the placed points to know where their boundaries are located.

    Trouble in paradise

    Surveyors have been measuring for centuries using a plethora of instruments and methods; how could introducing GNSS coordinates to everyday projects create issues? It once again comes down to training, understanding of the equipment and technology and how to relate vintage survey data to newfangled data collection and measurement. Here are a few of the potential problem areas:

    1. Working in Ground or Grid Coordinates? What geoid model are you working with? You mean there’s a difference? It’s amazing to me the amount of surveyors that don’t know that there truly is a difference. If you are using GNSS/GPS and don’t know the difference, put the receiver down now and pull out your total station. Same goes for the geoid model; if you don’t know the difference between orthometric heights and ellipsoid heights, look it up and learn ASAP. Your data will thank you.
    2. Relating survey data based upon conventional plane geometry versus GNSS data based upon spherical geometry. Depending on the age of the survey data, it could have been collected by several different method, (chaining, EDM, triangulation,etc.) and will vary from GNSS data collection. Just because your data collector coordinates reads to ten decimal places doesn’t make it more accurate that old measurements. Get to know what is acceptable variations in measurements from old work and when real trouble is lurking, not just the occasional tenth or two.
    3. Varying correction signals from RTN network providers. While any network being used for GNSS RTK data collection worth its salt is being monitored for anomolies, things happen and signals can get compromised. Check your data, then check it again. Just because the data collector says the horizontal and vertical precisions are within tolerances, they can and will lie. Check periodically to make sure everything is in good working order. Watch your satellite counts and constellations as well for good geometry. Just like any other measuring technique, proper procedures must be followed.

    These are just the highlights of potential issues and not intended to be a comprehensive list.

    Can’t we all just get along?

    On one side of the fence is Old Joe Surveyor with his trusty metal detector, shovel, total station and sidekick for a prism holder. He’s the one finding irons and shooting fences, looking for signs of occupation because “that’s the way he was taught; follow in the footsteps of the original surveyor.” He doesn’t like technology and would prefer if those who have it would just stay away and leave him be. For him, 2 + 2 = 4, but it might need to be prorated down to 3.95 depending on the monuments.

    On the other side of the fence is Kyle the New Surveyor/Geomatics Professional. He’s talked his boss into the latest toys; GNSS on an RTN network, robotic total station with scanning capability, and working on the getting the UAV flying soon with his Part 107 certification. He sees the world as one big GIS database and everything is spatial. Utilities, property corners, and improvements have coordinates with physical addresses just waiting to be collected and stored in the “cloud”. Everything is mathematics, equations and algorithms; numbers don’t lie. For Kyle, 2 + 2 = 4 because the professor said so and completed the proof during lab time.

    While I know these two gentlemen are the extreme opposites of most surveyors, they epitimize a great deal of what is seen in every day business. When these two cross paths, there will always be differences until we can work out common ground for both. For instance, my last article included the “Rule of Construction” for analyzing survey data:

    Priority of Evidence Rules

    1. Possessory Evidence
    2. Seniority of Title
    3. Documentary Evidence

    a. Call for a survey

    b. Call for monuments

    i. Natural

    ii. Artificial

    iii. Record

    c. Distance (or Direction)

    d. Direction (or Distance)

    e. Area

    f. Coordinates

    Kyle loves his coordinates. See where coordinates fall? This is because case law has established the higher weight of survey information. Distances and bearing are above them simply based upon how things have been establish and marked for many generations. Of course, Joe sticks to the monuments. Notice on top of the list is “Possessory Evidence”; fancy words for monuments or other features depicting occupation and/or possession. These are tangible, real items that are observed, locations recorded and relied upon by both the land owner and the surveyor to define boundary lines.

    This goes back to the section above about a “man and his castle” and he wants to know where his kingdom lies. It may be iron rods, fences, shoreline, creek, etc., but he can see it and know what he owns. Because these landowners are the clients of the surveyor, we provide them what they want; tangible boundary limits physically defined.

    But monuments can be a divisive as well. Here is another reason I don’t want to see coordinates take a higher priority:

    monuments-divisive

    As a young surveyor, the term I was taught was “pin farm” and they grow like weeds. Most surveyors feel their corner will be superior to the others and therefore set another rod right beside the others. Jeff Lucas, surveyor and attorney from Alabama, wrote an entire book on “The Pincushion Effect” because of situations like this. When several different surveyors using different GNSS on the same theoretical coordinate system stake a corner based upon varying evidence, this is what we get.

    Also, GNSS might not be involved at all and is simply based upon conventional survey data collection. Or some mix of all of the above. Either way, I count five (5) iron pins and the fence corner; which one fits the data best? Better yet, which one is right?

    The big difference with these examples versus last article’s concern about surveying tens of thousands of acres in Alaska that no one will ever inhabit is simple; it is setting a bad precedent. The surveys in Alaska are to be performed by the BLM and follow their specific guidelines for original surveys, so they are unique in that respect.

    However, by not setting corners per their own standards and utilizing a coordinate-based plat for subdividing townships will send an unintended message to surveyors throughout the states. That message will be that setting corners for government lines will no longer be necessary and simply file a plat with coordinates at your local recorder’s office. If you don’t think it will happen, just check out the multitude of surveyors who use the BLM manual for recreating sections by original surveyor instructions instead of retracement methods. Bottom line is they simply don’t know better.

    As I’ve stated in past columns, I enjoy technology almost as much as I enjoy surveying and hope the innovations continue. I want to continue to push the limits of what we can do with the equipment, software and data but also not forget who we are working for. The clients are the ones who rely on our expertise to show them what they own and how they can work with their property. Spatial data is here to stay and look forward to utilizing it more in all aspects of surveying and engineering. However, existing laws and court cases are going to have to catch up to the technology before we can start placing higher priorities on coordinates and digital data. I do utilize it as much as the next surveyor but try to use it wisely. After all, just like any other professional, aren’t we “practicing” surveyors?

  • Carlson releases BRx6 GNSS receiver for surveyors

    Carlson releases BRx6 GNSS receiver for surveyors

    Carlson Software has released the Carlson BRx6, a multi-GNSS, multi-frequency receiver. Each BRx6 contains a multi-constellation, multi-band 372-channel GNSS receiver, Athena RTK technology and an integrated Atlas L-band receiver.

    PositionIT-Carlson-620x620-e1464842339861In addition, the BRx6 contains electronic sensors that measure tilt, direction (electronic compass) and acceleration, supporting Carlson SurvCE’s advanced features such as LDL (live digital level or e-bubble), leveling tolerance, auto by level, tilted-pole correction and advanced stakeout features.

    SurvCE contains sophisticated checks for compass and acceleration anomalies to ensure accuracy.
    Designed for use by surveyors, contractors, builders and engineers, the Carlson BRx6 delivers the high positional accuracy at an affordable price.

    Manufactured to Carlson’s exacting specifications by Hemisphere GNSS, the BRx6 provides robust performance and high precision in a compact and rugged package, Carlson said. With multiple wireless communication ports and an open GNSS interface, the BRx6 can be used as a precise base station or as a lightweight and easy-to-use rover.

    The BRx6 receiver is powered by an Athena RTK (real-time kinematic) engine. RTK corrections can be received over UHF radio, cell modem, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth or serial connection.

    The BRx6 also works as a base and rover with the new Carlson Listen-Listen cloud-based low latency RTK correction delivery service. The Carlson Listen-Listen service taps the built-in cell modem and reduces the need for UHF radio communication.

    Multiple RTK rovers of any type can “talk to” a single BRx6 base by cell modem or Wi-Fi hot spot over extreme long distances. It reduces or eliminates dependency on VRS systems. Listen-Listen is provided on a free, 30-day trial basis with each BRx6 base and rover package purchased.

    The BRx6 receiver can also be used with the subscription-based Atlas service, Hemisphere’s industry leading global correction service provided over L-band communication satellites and the internet.

    When this service is included in an upcoming release of Carlson SurvCE, BRx6 users can achieve sub-decimeter positioning performance anywhere on earth, without the need for a fixed base station, a virtual reference network or other communication infrastructure.

    The BRx6 can be purchased as either a rover or as a base/rover package. The base/Rover package includes two BRx6 GNSS receivers, two hard-sided carrying cases, four BRx6 batteries with two chargers, one GPS tribrach and one tribrach adapter, and two Carlson GPS receiver poles. The Rover package includes the BRx6 GNSS receiver, carrying case, two BRx6 batteries with charger, and cables. The BRx6 rover is available as a network rover (GSM cell modem only) or as a complete rover with UHF radio and GSM cell modem.

    The Carlson BRx6 GNSS receiver is designed to work seamlessly with most data collectors including Carlson’s rugged and popular data collectors: the Carlson MINI2, the Carlson Surveyor2 and the Carlson RT3ruggedized tablet.

  • Establishing orthometric heights using GNSS — Part 8

    Establishing orthometric heights using GNSS — Part 8

    Upcoming Survey Scene newsletters will carry additional columns in this series.

    Basic procedures and tools for determining valid published NAVD 88 GNSS-derived orthometric heights for constraints

    These columns have provided the reader with basic concepts, routines and procedures for understanding, analyzing, evaluating and estimating GNSS-derived ellipsoid and orthometric heights.

    In my last column, Part 7 (June 2016), we analyzed the changes in adjusted heights due to different leveling-derived NAVD 88 height constraints and compared the results with the published NAVD 88 leveling-derived orthometric heights. My column demonstrated how every constraint has an influence on the final set of adjusted heights.

    As mentioned in previous columns, when incorporating new geodetic data into the National Spatial Reference System (NSRS), it is important to maintain consistency between neighboring stations. If the station has moved since the last time its height was established then not constraining the published value and superseding the height is the appropriate action to take. As I emphasized in Part 6 (April 2016), if the difference is not due to movement but due to some other reason such as the results of a previous adjustment distribution correction then superseding the height may not be the appropriate action to take. In Part 6, we looked at the network design of the NAVD 88 project and estimated the potential NAVD 88 distribution correction between two benchmarks involved in the original NAVD 88 general adjustment. It was also mentioned in the last newsletter that all of the analysis and recommendations have been based on using the latest scientific geoid model xGeoid15b.

    However, in practice, GNSS-derived orthometric heights are incorporated into the NAVD 88 using the latest hybrid geoid model, i.e., GEOID12B. I recommend first performing the analysis using the scientific geoid model because the hybrid geoid model has been warped to be consistent with the published NAVD 88 values. This was described in detail in my October 2015 newsletter. The analysis using the scientific geoid should be included in the project report especially if the user finds significant differences between the results using the two different geoid models. In my last column, I stated that “maintaining consistency between closely spaced stations is extremely important when incorporating data into an existing network. Based on the information so far and the results using GEOID12B, I would not recommend constraining the published NAVD 88 heights of stations PHANIEL and PLAZA in the final NAVD 88 GNSS-derived orthometric height adjustment. These two stations resulted in significant changes in relative adjusted heights when they were constrained. (See Part 6.)”

    It was also noted in a previous column (Part 5, February 2016) that 10 of the 2015 GNSS Rowan County Height Modernization project’s stations have published NAVD 88 GNSS-derived orthometric heights. These station are denoted as Height Modernization stations and are important because they are on the edge of the network where there’s a void of published NAVD 88 leveling-derived orthometric heights. In this newsletter, for these 10 stations we will look at the differences between their published NAVD 88 heights and their adjusted GNSS-derived orthometric heights from the Rowan County project.

    First, we need to briefly look at one of the leveling-derived stations — Station PLAZA — that was identified as a potential outlier in Part 7. In that column, I provided the following information about station PLAZA:

    The geodetic data and information for station PLAZA is listed below:

    • As described in Part 6 (April 2016), station PLAZA and station FIFTH have a large relative difference between the adjusted GNSS-derived orthometric height and the published NAVD 88 orthometric height value (-3.2 cm);
    • Four other stations in the vicinity have small relative differences between the adjusted GNSS-derived orthometric heights and the published NAVD 88 orthometric heights values, 37 DRD (0.6 cm), Midtown (-0.1 cm), Midway (1.0 cm), and J 181 (1.1 cm) — indicating a problem with station PLAZA;
    • Station FIFTH and PLAZA are only 400 meters apart, and their adjusted heights were established in two different adjustments: station FIFTH was leveled in 2013 (adjustment date of March 2015) and station PLAZA was leveled to in 1989 (adjustment date of September 1997) — indicating a potential inconsistency between adjustments;
    • PLAZA’s datasheet states that “the station was recovered as described in 2012 except the area between the curb and sidewalk has been filled with concrete. Mark is now part of the sidewalk but does not appear to have been disturbed.”

    Based on the available information to date, I would not recommend constraining the published height of station PLAZA in the final adjustment. Once again, this station’s published height should not be superseded by the GNSS project until new leveling has been performed between station FIFTH and PLAZA.

    As I mentioned, Station PLAZA’s published height should not be superseded by the GNSS project until new leveling has been performed between station FIFTH and PLAZA. Well, ask and you will receive. Gary Thompson, the director of the North Carolina Geodetic Survey, had one of his field crews, which was in the area, relevel the section between station FIFTH and PLAZA. The newly leveled results changed the leveling-derived height of PLAZA relative to FIFTH by 3.5 cm. The new leveling-derived orthometric height of PLAZA now agrees with the GNSS-derived orthometric height to within a centimeter.

    This means that the published height of PLAZA should not be constrained in the final adjustment and should be superseded by the GNSS-derived orthometric height. If the leveling data is submitted to NGS for inclusion into the NAVD 88, then the NAVD 88 height resulting from the new leveling data should be constrained in the final adjustment.

    Now, let’s look at the 2015 GNSS Rowan County Height Modernization project’s stations that have published NAVD 88 GNSS-derived orthometric heights. The user can identify stations that have been established following NGS Height Modernization procedures by looking at NGS datasheets. The datasheets for Height Modernization stations have the following statement at the top of the datasheet: “This is a Height Modernization Survey Station.” In addition to that statement, the NAVD 88 orthometric height is published to the centimeter level with the attribute code of “GPS OBS.” (See the example titled “Excerpt from the NGS Datasheet for Station GOODMAN.)

    Excerpt from the NGS Datasheet for Station GOODMAN

    1 National Geodetic Survey, Retrieval Date = JULY 2, 2016
    DL9977 ***********************************************************************
    DL9977 HT_MOD – This is a Height Modernization Survey Station.
    DL9977 DESIGNATION – GOODMAN
    DL9977 PID – DL9977
    DL9977 STATE/COUNTY- NC/STANLY
    DL9977 COUNTRY – US
    DL9977 USGS QUAD – GOLD HILL (1983)
    DL9977
    DL9977 *CURRENT SURVEY CONTROL
    DL9977 ______________________________________________________________________
    DL9977* NAD 83(2011) POSITION- 35 30 06.47415(N) 080 15 37.24680(W) ADJUSTED
    DL9977* NAD 83(2011) ELLIP HT- 171.358 (meters) (06/27/12) ADJUSTED
    DL9977* NAD 83(2011) EPOCH – 2010.00
    DL9977* NAVD 88 ORTHO HEIGHT – 201.76 (meters) 661.9 (feet) GPS OBS
    DL9977 ______________________________________________________________________
    DL9977 NAVD 88 orthometric height was determined with geoid model GEOID09
    DL9977 GEOID HEIGHT – -30.377 (meters) GEOID09
    DL9977 GEOID HEIGHT – -30.402 (meters) GEOID12B
    DL9977 NAD 83(2011) X – 879,427.184 (meters) COMP
    DL9977 NAD 83(2011) Y – -5,123,507.841 (meters) COMP
    DL9977 NAD 83(2011) Z – 3,683,429.929 (meters) COMP
    DL9977 LAPLACE CORR – 1.70 (seconds) DEFLEC12B
    DL9977
    DL9977 Network accuracy estimates per FGDC Geospatial Positioning Accuracy
    DL9977 Standards:
    DL9977 FGDC (95% conf, cm) Standard deviation (cm) CorrNE
    DL9977 Horiz Ellip SD_N SD_E SD_h (unitless)
    DL9977 ——————————————————————-
    DL9977 NETWORK 0.41 0.80 0.18 0.15 0.41 -0.01103221
    DL9977 ——————————————————————-
    DL9977 Click here for local accuracies and other accuracy information.
    DL9977

    The procedures for analyzing the published NAVD 88 GNSS-derived orthometric heights are the same as those used to analyze the NAVD 88 leveling-derived orthometric heights. These procedures and routines have been documented in my previous columns. There is, however, one major difference between incorporating new leveling data into NAVD 88 and incorporating new GNSS data into NAVD 88. That is, when a station gets superseded in a leveling network adjustment due to previous adjustment distribution corrections, to maintain consistency the older leveling data in the area are readjusted to be consistent with the newly observed leveling data and latest published adjusted heights.

    An adjustment distribution correction from the NAVD 88 general adjustment was discussed in the Part 7 (See Figure 6, “An Example of an Estimate of the NAVD 88 Distribution Correction Between two Stations Established with Old Leveling Data and Large Loops.”). So, what’s the difference?

    Both NAVD88 leveling-derived orthometric heights and GNSS-derived orthometric heights are based on adjustments constraining NAVD 88 published orthometric heights. However, GNSS-derived orthometric heights are also computed using the latest NGS hybrid geoid model. If a station’s GNSS-derived orthometric height gets superseded, the previous GNSS data are not readjusted to be consistent with the latest observations and published heights. Once again, if the station physically moved then superseding the height is the appropriate action and there is no requirement to readjust the older GNSS data.

    However, if the station did not physically move then the new published height may be inconsistent with its neighboring stations. I’m not saying that this is right or wrong, I’m only mentioning it so the user considers this information in their analysis.

    The procedures outlined in NGS’ NGS 59 document, which was discussed in Part 5, were developed to minimize the effect due to different geoid models and superseded heights. (See excerpt titled “Four Basic Control Requirements for Estimating GNSS-Derived Orthometric Heights.”) The requirements include surrounding the project with valid NAVD 88 benchmarks and, if necessary, enlarging the project area to occupy enough leveling-derived benchmarks. The intent of these requirements are to help control any small relative differences between previously published hybrid geoid models. It should be noted that some of the latest hybrid geoid models are significantly different the older hybrid geoid models.

    Therefore, when comparing a project’s adjusted heights with published NAVD 88 GNSS-derived orthometric heights, the user needs to consider which hybrid geoid model was used to establish the published GNSS-derived orthometric height. The NGS datasheet provides the hybrid geoid model and geoid height value used to establish the height. This was highlighted on the datasheet for station GOODMAN (see the example titled “Excerpt From the NGS Datasheet for Station GOODMAN). The statement NAVD 88 orthometric height was determined with geoid model GEOID09 means that station GOODMAN’s GNSS-derived orthometric height was established in a GNSS project using the hybrid geoid model GEOID09. The question is, what’s the difference between GEOID09 and the latest hybrid model?

    The datasheet provides the hybrid geoid model value used to establish the height (in this example, GEOID09 = -30.377 m) as well as the latest hybrid geoid model value (in this example, GEOID12B = -30.402 m). Based on station GOODMAN’s published datasheet, the difference is only 2.5 cm. This difference may be much larger in the mountains of North Carolina.

    Four Basic Control Requirements
    for Estimating GNSS-Derived Orthometric Heights:

    Requirement 1: GNSS-occupy stations with valid NAVD 88 orthometric heights; stations should be evenly distributed throughout project.

    Requirement 2: For project areas less than 20 km on a side, surround project with valid NAVD 88 benchmarks, i.e., minimum number of stations is four; one in each corner of project. [NOTE: The user may have to enlarge the project area to occupy enough benchmarks, even if the project area extends beyond the original area of interest.]

    Requirement 3: For project areas greater than 20 km on a side, keep distances between valid GNSS-occupied NAVD 88 benchmarks to less than 20 km.

    Requirement 4: For projects located in mountainous regions, occupy valid benchmarks at the base and summit of mountains, even if the distance is less than 20 km.

    Station BLACK BEAR, located in the mountains near Asheville, North Carolina, is an example of a significant difference between GEOID09 and GEOID12B; the difference is -14.9 cm. (See the example titled “Excerpt from the NGS Datasheet for Station BLACK BEAR.) This may not be a problem if all stations in the area are effected by the same difference but that’s not the case in this area.

    Station BUCK is a nearby station (about 11 km away from BLACK BEAR) and according to the NGS database “mark_source option”, stations BLACK BEAR and BUCK were involved in the same GNSS project so their GNSS-derived orthometric heights most likely were established in the same adjustment project. [NOTE: The use of the “mark_source” option of the NGS datasheet was described in Part 7.] The GEOID09 and GEOID12B difference at station BUCK is 1.0 cm. The relative difference in hybrid geoid models between stations BLACK BEAR and BUCK is almost 16 cm.

    Excerpt from the NGS Datasheet for Station BLACK BEAR

    PROGRAM = datasheet95, VERSION = 8.9
    1 National Geodetic Survey, Retrieval Date = JULY 26, 2016
    DM2549 ***********************************************************************
    DM2549 HT_MOD – This is a Height Modernization Survey Station.
    DM2549 DESIGNATION – BLACK BEAR
    DM2549 PID – DM2549
    DM2549 STATE/COUNTY- NC/YANCEY
    DM2549 COUNTRY – US
    DM2549 USGS QUAD – MT MITCHELL (1946)
    DM2549
    DM2549 *CURRENT SURVEY CONTROL
    DM2549 ______________________________________________________________________
    DM2549* NAD 83(2011) POSITION- 35 46 00.04321(N) 082 15 54.04248(W) ADJUSTED
    DM2549* NAD 83(2011) ELLIP HT- 1974.465 (meters) (06/27/12) ADJUSTED
    DM2549* NAD 83(2011) EPOCH – 2010.00
    DM2549* NAVD 88 ORTHO HEIGHT – 2004.48 (meters) 6576.4 (feet) GPS OBS
    DM2549 ______________________________________________________________________
    DM2549 NAVD 88 orthometric height was determined with geoid model GEOID09
    DM2549 GEOID HEIGHT – -29.990 (meters) GEOID09
    DM2549 GEOID HEIGHT – -29.841 (meters) GEOID12B
    DM2549 NAD 83(2011) X – 697,556.510 (meters) COMP
    DM2549 NAD 83(2011) Y – -5,135,618.055 (meters) COMP
    DM2549 NAD 83(2011) Z – 3,708,370.482 (meters) COMP
    DM2549 LAPLACE CORR – -6.14 (seconds) DEFLEC12B
    DM2549
    DM2549 Network accuracy estimates per FGDC Geospatial Positioning Accuracy
    DM2549 Standards:
    DM2549 FGDC (95% conf, cm) Standard deviation (cm) CorrNE
    DM2549 Horiz Ellip SD_N SD_E SD_h (unitless)
    DM2549 ——————————————————————-
    DM2549 NETWORK 0.47 0.86 0.21 0.17 0.44 -0.05699591
    DM2549 ——————————————————————-
    DM2549 Click here for local accuracies and other accuracy information.
    DM2549

    chart

    Figure 1 is a contour plot of the differences between GEOID12A and GEOID09 in the area surrounding stations BLACK BEAR and BUCK. [NOTE: The ESRI raster plots are based on GEOID12A not GEOID12B. GEOID12A is identical to GEOID12B everywhere, except in Puerto Rico and Virgin Island region. Therefore, in North Carolina, GEOID12A is equivalent to GEOID12B.] Looking at the plot it is obvious that there is a significant difference between the two hybrid geoid models in this region of North Carolina. What does this mean to someone performing a new GNSS-derived orthometric height adjustment in the area? If they occupied station BLACK BEAR and compared their adjusted GNSS-derived orthometric height using GEOID12B to the NAVD 88 published GNSS-derived orthometric height that was established using GEOID09, they most likely will get a large residual due to the difference between the two hybrid geoid models. As previously mentioned in this newsletter, NGS’ NGS 59 guidelines were developed to minimize the effects of different hybrid geoid models, but in these extreme cases the procedures may not have been able to minimize the total effect. It is important for the user to understand the differences between the various published hybrid models and experimental geoid models being developed by NGS. This topic was discussed in detail in the October 2015 newsletter.

    Figure-1
    Figure 1. A contour plot of the differences between GEOID12A and GEOID09 in the area surrounding stations BLACK BEAR and BUCK.

    Now, let’s look at the published NAVD 88 GNSS-derived orthometric heights occupied in the Rowan County Height Modernization project. Table 1 is a list of the stations occupied in the Rowan County project that have published NAVD 88 GNSS-derived orthometric heights. The table provides the hybrid geoid model value used to establish the published NAVD 88 height as well as the latest hybrid geoid model value, GEOID12B. Figure 2 is a contour plot of the differences between the GEOID12A and GEOID09 in the Rowan County Height Modernization project area. Looking at the plot, the user can see that most of the differences are all less than 3 cm between GEOID12A and GEOID09 in the Rowan County Project area.

    Figure-2
    Figure 2. A contour Plot of the differences between GEOID12A and GEOID09 in the Rowan County Height Modernization project area.

    Table1

    As we can see from Table 1, all of the differences between the two hybrid geoid models are less than or equal to 2.5 cm. (See highlighted rows and column in Table 1.)

    Figure 2 plots the adjusted GNSS-derived orthometric height (using GEOID12B) from a minimally constrained adjustment minus the published NAVD 88 GNSS-derived orthometric heights. Most of the differences are less than 3 cm which for some stations could be a result of the difference hybrid geoid models to establish the published GNSS-derived orthometric heights.

    Looking at figure 2, almost all of the differences between the GNSS-derived orthometric heights (using GEOID12B) from the minimum-constraint least squares compared with the published NAVD 88 GNSS-derived orthometric heights are less than 3 cm. No station appears to be an obvious outlier. The fact that all differences except for one are negative is interesting and is worth investigating at a later date. More analysis will need to be performed to understand if this is significant or not. Table 2 provides the adjusted GNSS-derived heights from a minimally constrained adjustment minus the published heights (both ellipsoid and orthometric).

    The last item to look at is a comparison of the adjusted heights from a constrained adjustment where all valid published leveling-derived heights were constrained. Figure 3 and Table 2 provide the constrained adjustment results (where all of leveling-derived published heights except for the 3 suspect heights were constrained) compared with the published NAVD 88 GNSS-derived orthometric heights. All of the differences are less than +/- 2 cm except for station NATHAN which is -2.1 cm. All of the relative differences of closely-spaced stations are less than 2 cm and most are less than 1 cm. This means constraining these stations should not adversely influence the unconstrained stations. Note that after constraining the published NAVD 88 leveling-derived heights, the negative bias is gone but the differences do not appear to be random. That is, the northern stations are all negative and the southern stations are positive (See figure 3).

    Table2

    Figure 3. A plot of the constrained adjustment results (where all of leveling-derived published heights except for the 3 suspect heights were constrained) compared with the published NAVD 88 GNSS-derived orthometric heights.
    Figure 3. A plot of the constrained adjustment results (where all of leveling-derived published heights except for the 3 suspect heights were constrained) compared with the published NAVD 88 GNSS-derived orthometric heights.

    These newsletters have focused on procedures and routines for establishing GNSS-derived orthometric heights. There are many ways to analyze and investigate GNSS data and adjustment results. I have provided some basic concepts that I believe are important for users to understand. The selection of constraints is a very important part of establishing accurate and consistent NAVD 88 GNSS-derived orthometric heights. It is just as important to document all decisions and results so others know how the published heights were established. NGS has a prescribed set of data and information that are required when submitted data for inclusion into the NSRS. This information is available from the NGS website (see section titled “MATERIALS NEEDED TO SUBMIT FOR THE PROJECT” in the document “adjustment_guidelines.pdf.”). We will address submitting the results in future columns.

    In my next column, I will focus on the NGS GPS on BMS (GPSBM) dataset. This is the dataset used to create the hybrid geoid models; I mentioned this in Part 3. As mentioned in Part 3, the hybrid geoid model is designed to fit the published NAVD 88 leveling-derived orthometric heights. This file can be used to identify potential issues in the NAVD 88 network. GNSS users should be familiar with this dataset and how it can be useful to their analysis. My next column will address this topic.

  • Launchpad: OEM, UAV and survey/mapping products

    OEM

    Geodetic Antennas

    For RTK, PPP, and other precision applications

    TW6000 rendered[1]

    The VP6300 is a triple-band antenna for reception of GPS L1/L2/L5, GLONASS G1/G2/G3, BeiDou B1/B2 and Galileo E1/E5a+b (1165MHz to 1254MHz + 1560MHz to 1610MHz). The VP6200 is a dual-band antenna for reception of GPS L1/L2, GLONASS G1/G2, BeiDou B1/B2, Galileo E1 and the L-Band correction services (1195 MHz to 1254 MHz + 1525 MHz to 1610 MHz). Both antennas have been calibrated by the U.S. National Geodetic Survey and are designed for high-precision applications such as real-time kinematic, precise point positioning and other applications where precision matters. The antennas feature an available, uncommitted printed circuit board for integration of custom electronics such as precision GNSS receivers. Both antennas feature the VeraPhase technology used in the VP6000 all-band reference antenna.

    Tallysman, www.tallysman.com

    ‘Future Proof’ RTK

    For rover or base station

    Image_Altus_APS3G_external_use

    The Altus APS3G is a real-time kinematic (RTK) receiver that brings technology from scientific receivers into the field for professional surveyors. The new multi-constellation APS3G addresses major concerns about compatibility with new satellite constellations, as well as interference and jamming. Built on Septentrio’s AsteRx4 engine, the APS3G tracks all-in-view GPS, GLONASS, BeiDou, IRNSS, SBAS, Galileo and QZSS, including E6/L6 and all other signals known to be available in the medium term. The APS3G incorporates Septentrio’s AIM technology with three notch filters for in-band jamming and chirp jammer resistance, ensuring the highest possible levels of accuracy and resilience under all conditions. It provides optimum GSM signal reception, as well as a built-in advanced UHF receiver for reliable performance on longer baselines, yielding real-time 25-Hz RTK.

    Septentrio, www.septentrio.com

    GNSS Receiver

    Offshore surveys, machine control, crustal deformation

    N72_Hi-res

    CHC’s N72 GNSS series offers high-end receivers for GNSS applications including offshore surveys and machine control, national geodetic networks, crustal deformation monitoring and bathymetry. It was designed to provide all the necessary technical features required for geodetic surveying and demanding applications such as Continuously Operating Reference Stations (CORS), on-board machine control and disaster monitoring. Embedded battery supports 15 working hours without external power supply; 32-GB internal memory integrated and 1TB+ external memory supported; Eight threads of logging with circulating storage and FTP push functions; Wi-Fi, LAN, Bluetooth and serial ports for data communications; and LCD display and function buttons for direct configuration.

    CHC, www.chcnav.com

    Anti-Jam Antenna

    Suitable for airborne platforms

    GAJT-AE 34 view

    The GAJT-AE-N anti-jam antenna is designed for size- and weight-constrained applications such as small airborne and ground unmanned platforms where it is preferable to mount the antenna electronics inside the vehicle. Users can select from a variety of four-element Controlled Reception Pattern Antennas (CRPA) and cabling lengths to meet the form factor requirements of their installation. Interference mitigation is achieved by applying proprietary digital beamforming algorithms to the signals, creating dynamic nulls to give protection against narrowband and broadband interference sources. GAJT-AE-N comes in variants that protect L1 and L2 signals in wide or narrow band. The wide bandwidth version ensures future compatibility with M-code GPS.

    NovAtel, www.novatel.com

    Transportation

    GNSS Modules

    Automotive-grade positioning modules

    UB052(Fig1)

    The NEO-M8Q-01A and the NEO-M8L-01A positioning modules provide concurrent reception of GPS, GLONASS, Beidou and Galileo. The NEO-M8L-01A is suited to providing 100 percent dead-reckoning positioning coverage even in areas of weak signal such as in tunnels or multi-story car parks or those experiencing poor signal quality such as caused by multipath reflections. This module is qualified to operate in the -40 to +85 degrees temperature range. The NEO-M8Q-01 GNSS module is the first GNSS module able to operate across the extended automotive temperature range from -40 to + 105 degrees Celsius.

    u-blox, www.u-blox.com

    Connected Car Reference Platform

    Simplifies integration of advanced connectivity technologies into new vehicles

    2016-06-06-ch-qualcomm-cc-reference-platform

    The Qualcomm Connected Car Reference Platform is aimed at accelerating the adoption of advanced and complex connectivity into the next-generation of connected cars. The product is designed to maintain pace with an ever-increasing set of automotive use cases facilitated by the latest advances in 4G LTE, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and vehicle-to-everything (V2X) communications. The platform is also designed to solve for challenges such as wireless coexistence, future-proofing and support for a large number of in-car hardware architectures. The Connected Car Reference Platform is built upon Qualcomm Technologies’ broad automotive product and technology portfolio, including quad-constellation GNSS, Snapdragon X12 and X5 LTE modems, and 2D/3D dead-reckoning location solutions, Qualcomm VIVE Wi-Fi technology, Dedicated Short Range Communications (DSRC) for V2X, Bluetooth, Bluetooth Low Energy and broadcast capabilities such as analog and digital tuner support using software-defined radio via Qualcomm tuneX chips. In addition, the platform features in-vehicle networking technologies such as Gigabit (OABR) Ethernet with Automotive Audio Bus (A2B) and Controller Area Network (CAN) interfaces.

    Qualcomm Technologies, www.qualcomm.com

    SURVEY & MAPPING

    TotalStationSurveyTotal Station App

    Connects Android device to information gathered 

    Total Station Survey helps land surveyors and civil engineers view and inspect on any Android device the information gathered by the total station. It connects to the total station using Bluetooth or a USB-serial adapter/converter cable. It can measure horizontal and vertical angle, slope and horizontal distance, and set the horizontal angle on the total station. The app is available free on Google Play.

    Systranova Software, play.google.com

    Laser and Android App

    Collect survey-grade accuracy with an Android device 

    TP300_QM3D_Cedar_TriPod_CloseUp_001

    The TruPoint 300 is a lightweight, compact point-and-shoot laser with survey-grade accuracy. It measures the distance between two remote points and has onboard solutions for volume, heights and 2D and 3D areas. Users can collect 3D measurements from a single location using a personal smart device and capture a photo of every shot taken, using LTI’s MapSmart on Android software. MapSmart combines sophisticated technology typically required to collect field data and puts it into a straightforward app for smart devices. It simplifies the mapping process by allowing users to establish an origin quickly and begin mapping in just minutes. Users can integrate location data using the GPS from a smart device or improve accuracy with an external antenna.
    Laser Technology, www.lasertech.com

    Laser Technology, www.lasertech.com

    Smartphone App

    Quick land measurements 

    GPS Fields Area

    GPS Fields Area Measure Pro is easy, intuitive, app to manage area, distance, perimeter. It enables fast area/distance marking, and ha a Smart Marker Mode for accurate pin placement. Its GPS tracking enables auto measurement while walking or driving around a boundary. Users can share an auto-generated link with boundary/selected area/ direction/route. GPS Field Area Measure useful as map measurement tool for outdoor activities, sports, range finder applications, bike tour planning, or run tour planning, explore golf area, land survey, golf distance meter, field pasture area measure, garden and farm work and planning, area records, construction, agricultural fencing, solar panel installation – roof area estimation, trip planning.

    Studio Noframe, play.google.com

    Dedicated 3D Tablet

    Capture and review 3D images in the field  

    3DTablet

    The EyesMap tablet is a versatile instrument for modeling 3D scenes indoors and outdoors. It provides results while working in the field with real-time measurements. The tablet has a stereocamera, depth sensor scanner, GPS and inertial measureent unit. It also supports external cameras and other topographic instruments. Applications include crime scene investigation, archaeology and architecture documentation, as-built measurements and inspections, industrial and civil maintenance.

    eCapture, www.ecapture.es

    Handheld Collector

    Entry-level GNSS device for GIS 

    TDC100_FrontThe TDC100 handheld data collector is an entry-level GNSS device for a variety of geographic information system (GIS) applications. It combines both smartphone and ruggedized data collection capabilities in a single, mobile device. The Android-based TDC100 can run commercially available or in-house developed applications on a professional, IP-67 ruggedized platform with a sunlight readable display and user replaceable batteries. The built-in GNSS receiver also provides real-time accuracy. It supports GPS, GLONASS and BeiDou, as well as satellite-based augmentation system (SBAS) capabilities.

    Trimble, www.trimble.com

    UAV

    RedHen-UAVreconnaissanceReconnaissance Kit

    Situational awareness for disaster relief

    The Digital Mapping Reconnaissance Toolkit (DMRT) provides real-time reconnaissance for disaster relief and other time-sensitive situations. . It is a custom configuration of cameras, laser rangefinder, GPS unit and software all linked through the Red Hen VMS-333 multiplexing system. Users can create up-to-date orthomosaic maps and 3D models, as well as geotag reference points in impacted areas without a time lag. Users can create search patterns and map with situational awareness. Both modular aerial and land-based solutions are available

    Red Hen Systems, www.redhensystems.com

    UAV Backpack

    Intelligent Obstacle Navigation

    Yuneec Typhoon H with Intel RealSense Technology (PRNewsFoto/Yuneec International)

    The Typhoon H UAV with Intel RealSense Technology comes with a factory installed Intel RealSense R200 Camera and quadcore Intel Atom processor, an ST16 controller with a Wizard controller for dual operator mode, two batteries and extra propellers, all packed in a custom designed backpack. RealSense Technology enables Typhoon H to fly autonomously, intelligently navigating around objects. The Intel RealSense R200 Camera and the Atom processor work seamlessly with the flight-control firmware to add intelligent obstacle navigation. With a combination of specialized cameras and sensors, this Intel system maps and learns its environment in 3D, recognizing each obstacle, planning an alternative route, and safely navigating around it — an advancement over ultrasonic collision prevention, which automatically stops short of obstacles but cannot model the environment or intelligently reroute around obstacles. The module also adds downward facing sensors to improve stability, enabling flight indoors or outdoors close to the ground, even with poor GPS reception.

     Yuneec International, www.yuneec.com

    Intelligence Platform

    Insight for complex missions

    Advanced alerting

    Mission Insight provides UAS operators in deployed situations with a common operating picture in a customized graphical interface. The commercial off-the-shelf application processes and analyzes large streams of data from disparate sources in real-time. It ensures real-time, in-depth data access for mission-critical events even in remote environments or low-bandwidth situations. Complex data filtering, advanced processing and timing techniques enable Mission Insight to prioritize data and allow transmission as low as 2400 baud. The complete information management solution —including archival and replay capabilities in addition to the correlation, fusion and analytical tools — aid in training, post-operation analysis, incident investigation and review of operational effectiveness.

    Simulyze, www.simulyze.com

    Multi-Spectral Camera

    Situational awareness for disaster relief

    Sensefly_Camera_2

    Sequoia is a small, light multispectral UAS sensor that captures images of crops across four highly defined, visible and non-visible spectral bands, plus RGB imagery. Sequoia is fully compatible with the eBee Ag and other eBee platforms via senseFly’s proprietary Integration Kit. It has four 1.2 megapixel sensors (near-infrared, red-edge, red and green) plus one 16 megapixel RGB sensor, providing multispectral and RGB imagery from a single flight. An upward-facing Sunshine Sensor automatically calibrates Sequoia’s multispectral sensors for accurate imagery, whatever the light conditions. The camera unit can be configured over Wi-Fi and has 64-GB of built-in storage; the Sunshine Sensor has GPS, an IMU, a magnetometer and SD card slot

    senseFly, www.sensefly.com

  • 3DR to integrate Site Scan with Esri Drone2Map

    Drone-maker 3DR is teaming up with Esri to integrate 3DR’s Site Scan software with Esri Drone2Map.

    3DR made the announcement at the Esri User Conference, held last week in San Diego.

    Designed for the field professional, Site Scan is an intuitive, powerful and open aerial data capture and analytics platform that delivers an end-to-end solution ready-made for existing mapping and survey workflows, 3DR said in a news release. With Site Scan and Drone2Map, Esri customers can safely, quickly and easily conduct surveys with the Solo smart drone and effortlessly deliver that data to ArcGIS and ArcGIS Online.

    “Aerial data capture technology is bringing about a revolution in surveying and mapping,” said Lawrie Jordan, Director of Imaging and Remote Sensing at Esri. “We are thrilled to partner with 3DR to streamline the creation of professional imagery products with Site Scan and Drone2Map for ArcGIS. Together we will accelerate the development and use of remote sensing across all industries.”

    Site Scan automatically calculates a flight plan and Solo autonomously executes both flight and image capture. Images are processed and integrated with Esri Drone2Map to create high-resolution georeferenced maps and digital elevation models to share as tile or feature services in ArcGIS and ArcGIS Online.

    “Capturing site data today is costly, time consuming and often dangerous. Drones can easily go where it’s inefficient or unsafe for field personnel, making it easier to accurately measure our world so we can better analyze and manage it,” said Chris Anderson, CEO of 3DR. “We’re delighted to partner with such a great industry leader and integrate Site Scan with Esri Drone2Map. Together, we offer a complete solution for site capture that will help our customers create maps that tell stories, record change over time and perform analysis all while saving time, saving money and keeping humans out of harm’s way.”

    Site Scan makes it safer and easier than ever for people in land management, GIS, mapping, energy, infrastructure and related fields to aggregate and process multiple forms of aerial imagery and data and easily incorporate them into the Esri tools they use every day, 3DR said.

    Engineering and survey firm McKim & Creed, based in Fort Worth, Texas, is one customer. “Utilizing the 3DR Solo and SiteScan allowed McKim & Creed to confidently collect accurate spatial information in dangerous and demanding environments where it would have been difficult to use traditional survey methods,” said Christian Stallings, R&D Manager at McKim & Creed.

    “Using Esri’s Drone2Map software, surveyed ground control and 3DR’s Solo, we were able to collect detailed elevation information and high-resolution orthophotography over a dredging containment pond operated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). This approach proved to be accurate and kept people out of harm’s way — which would only be achievable using this approach,” Stallings said.

    3DR designed Site Scan as an open and extensible platform. On the hardware side, the Solo smart drone has open gimbal and accessory bays, which give both 3DR and their global technology partners the ability to integrate additional cameras and sensors.

    Additionally, Solo firmware updates optimize the drone’s flight profile and performance. On the software side, 3DR continually updates the Site Scan application so that customers can take advantage of the most recent and advanced analytics technologies.

    With Site Scan, even users new to drone technology will fly with confidence from day one. The Site Scan app includes 3DR’s airspace safety information software, which alerts users if they’re about to fly in restricted airspace. They can then pull up a map of the area with all restrictions around them clearly marked.

    To support enterprise customers further, 3DR offers Success Services, including the Premier Success Plan. Included with their purchase of Success Services, all Site Scan users will have access to experts on Site Scan and Solo. They will also have a Solo overnight replacement guarantee should anything go wrong with one of their drones.

    Site Scan with Solo Enterprise is available immediately for order on store.3dr.com, priced at $3249 with a monthly service fee of $499 paid annually with a 12-month commitment.

  • Esri agreement to provide access to Chinese maps, imagery

    Dean Angelides, director of International Operations, Esri (left), and Feng Xianquang, director for NGCC, signed the historic agreement to share data with users around the world.
    Dean Angelides, director of International Operations, Esri (left), and Feng Xianquang, director for NGCC, signed the historic agreement to share data with users around the world.

    Esri and the National Geomatics Center of China (NGCC) have signed an agreement providing access to NGCC’s mapping web services, starting this fall.

    The historic agreement will allow more users outside of China to access the country’s authoritative cartographic and imagery data. Users of the Esri ArcGIS platform will have access to the maps for no additional charge.

    NGCC is a government agency attached to National Administration of Surveying, Mapping (NASG) and Geoinformation of China. NGCC is responsible for national data that is used in surveying and mapping projects in China, as well as facilitating the scientific and technological communication between agencies in China, in the areas of sharing geographic data and services over the web.

    “The cooperation between NGCC and Esri will enable a large number of ArcGIS online users to gain access to the rich regional online geodata of China,” said Zhigang Li, NASG chief engineer, on behalf of NASG. “The agreement will facilitate the scientific and technological communication between agencies by sharing geographic information and services over the web in the Asia Pacific Region. NGCC hopes this joint work is able to promote regional, even global, promotion of spatial data.”

    “We are honored to work with the government of China to provide access to the most current and authoritative basemaps for the country,” said Jack Dangermond, president of Esri. “We look forward to continued collaboration.”

    The web services will be available in the third quarter of 2016.

    Photo: Esri

  • Spectra Precision MobileMapper 50 combines smartphone design with GNSS capabilities

    Spectra Precision MobileMapper 50 combines smartphone design with GNSS capabilities

    Spectra Precision has announced its new MobileMapper 50 GNSS handheld device for simple GIS data collection or for use as a data controller for Spectra Precision SP60 and SP80 GNSS receivers. Available with an Android OS, the MobileMapper 50 combines smartphone capabilities with a ruggedized design to improve positioning accuracy.

    The company made the announcement at the 2016 Esri User Conference, being held in San Diego, California, June 27-July 1.

    Together with the MobileMapper 50, Spectra Precision also introduced two new software applications: an Android OS version of MobileMapper Field software for GIS professionals and Spectra Precision Survey Mobile software to control SP60 and SP80 GNSS receivers.

    “In today’s market, GIS and survey professional users are looking for a smartphone device experience, but still require a professional, rugged and waterproof design,” said Olivier Casabianca, general manager of Trimble’s Spectra Precision Division. ”With the MobileMapper 50 we can address all these requirements and more — real-time accuracy, the latest connectivity capabilities and a rugged compact design.”

    The MobileMapper 50 is available in two versions: both with Android OS and Wi-Fi, and with optional 4G LTE cellular module. The rugged, smartphone-like device is IP67 rated, thin (14.6 mm) and lightweight (300 grams or 10.6 ounces).

    It also features a 1.2 GHz quad core processor, 5.3 inch sunlight readable display, large memory (8 or 16 GB, depending on the version) and a high-resolution, built-in camera (8 or 15 MP, depending on the version). As a professional device, the MobileMapper 50 provides accurate GNSS positioning, supporting SABS, GPS, GLONASS and BeiDou constellations as well as post processing for improved accuracy.

  • ArcGIS apps for the field launched at Esri UC

    ArcGIS apps for the field launched at Esri UC

    Esri has launched two new ArcGIS apps for field operating efficiency at the Esri User Conference, being held June 27–July 1 in San Diego. Attendees can see live demonstrations and experiment with Drone2Map for ArcGIS and Survey123 for ArcGIS.

    “These two apps are already becoming game changers,” said Esri President Jack Dangermond. “What we’ve done is make it much easier for our users to collect data, including imagery, and then right away start working with that data — mapping, analyzing, sharing—in ArcGIS.”

    Drone2Map for ArcGIS provides safe and affordable imagery on demand—a benefit especially useful to people who work in land analysis or infrastructure inspection and those monitoring events such as natural disasters and environmental change. Drone2Map takes still imagery captured by a drone and quickly turns it into high-quality 2D and 3D products in ArcGIS.

    The app detects camera and sensor parameters and intelligently applies appropriate defaults. Its rapid-process capability allows teams in the field to be sure they’ve captured everything they need to avoid costly return trips. The imagery products created using Drone2Map can be used for analysis in ArcGIS Online and ArcGIS Pro to support informed decision-making.

    Esri Survey123.
    Esri Survey123.

    Survey123 for ArcGIS is a simple yet powerful form-centric field data gathering solution that makes it possible to create, share, and analyze surveys in three easy steps. With Survey123, paper forms are effectively transformed into digital surveys. Surveys, from simple to sophisticated, are authored and then shared in ArcGIS.

    Using the Survey123 mobile app for iOS, Android or Windows, teams in the field capture survey results with their smartphones and tablets, even in disconnected environments. Data captured in the field is immediately available for analysis in ArcGIS to help users make better decisions. Survey123 is a versatile data collection solution already popular with people in public health, education, public works, disaster response, and humanitarian agencies.

    Attendees of the Esri User Conference can see live demos and get hands-on experience with both of these new apps along with hundreds of other solutions designed to enable a smarter world.

    ]The annual event attracts 16,000 geographic information system (GIS) users, managers, and developers. It offers 300 moderated sessions, 450 hours of technical training, access to 300 software vendors, inspirational keynotes, and one-on-one sessions with Esri technical and professional support staff. See more of GPS World’s coverage.

    Learn more about Esri apps for the field.

  • 3DR to integrate Site Scan with Esri Drone2Map

    Today at the Esri User Conference, 3DR announced that it has teamed up with Esri to integrate 3DR’s Site Scan with Esri Drone2Map.

    Designed for the field professional, Site Scan is an intuitive, powerful and open aerial data capture and analytics platform that delivers an end-to-end solution ready-made for existing mapping and survey workflows, 3DR said in a news release. With Site Scan and Drone2Map, Esri customers can safely, quickly and easily conduct surveys with the Solo smart drone and effortlessly deliver that data to ArcGIS and ArcGIS Online.

    “Aerial data capture technology is bringing about a revolution in surveying and mapping,” said Lawrie Jordan, Director of Imaging and Remote Sensing at Esri. “We are thrilled to partner with 3DR to streamline the creation of professional imagery products with Site Scan and Drone2Map for ArcGIS. Together we will accelerate the development and use of remote sensing across all industries.”

    Site Scan automatically calculates a flight plan and Solo autonomously executes both flight and image capture. Images are processed and integrated with Esri Drone2Map to create high-resolution georeferenced maps and digital elevation models to share as tile or feature services in ArcGIS and ArcGIS Online.

    “Capturing site data today is costly, time consuming and often dangerous. Drones can easily go where it’s inefficient or unsafe for field personnel, making it easier to accurately measure our world so we can better analyze and manage it,” said Chris Anderson, CEO of 3DR. “We’re delighted to partner with such a great industry leader and integrate Site Scan with Esri Drone2Map. Together, we offer a complete solution for site capture that will help our customers create maps that tell stories, record change over time and perform analysis all while saving time, saving money and keeping humans out of harm’s way.”

    Site Scan makes it safer and easier than ever for people in land management, GIS, mapping, energy, infrastructure and related fields to aggregate and process multiple forms of aerial imagery and data and easily incorporate them into the Esri tools they use every day, 3DR said.

    Engineering and survey firm McKim & Creed, based in Fort Worth, Texas, is one customer. “Utilizing the 3DR Solo and SiteScan allowed McKim & Creed to confidently collect accurate spatial information in dangerous and demanding environments where it would have been difficult to use traditional survey methods,” said Christian Stallings, R&D Manager at McKim & Creed.

    “Using Esri’s Drone2Map software, surveyed ground control and 3DR’s Solo, we were able to collect detailed elevation information and high-resolution orthophotography over a dredging containment pond operated by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). This approach proved to be accurate and kept people out of harm’s way — which would only be achievable using this approach,” Stallings said.

    3DR designed Site Scan as an open and extensible platform. On the hardware side, the Solo smart drone has open gimbal and accessory bays, which give both 3DR and their global technology partners the ability to integrate additional cameras and sensors.

    Additionally, Solo firmware updates optimize the drone’s flight profile and performance. On the software side, 3DR continually updates the Site Scan application so that customers can take advantage of the most recent and advanced analytics technologies.

    With Site Scan, even users new to drone technology will fly with confidence from day one. The Site Scan app includes 3DR’s airspace safety information software, which alerts users if they’re about to fly in restricted airspace. They can then pull up a map of the area with all restrictions around them clearly marked.

    To support enterprise customers further, 3DR offers Success Services, including the Premier Success Plan. Included with their purchase of Success Services, all Site Scan users will have access to experts on Site Scan and Solo. They will also have a Solo overnight replacement guarantee should anything go wrong with one of their drones.

    Site Scan with Solo Enterprise is available immediately for order on store.3dr.com, priced at $3249 with a monthly service fee of $499 paid annually with a 12-month commitment.

  • Sentera launches fixed-wing Phoenix 2 imaging UAV

    Sentera launches fixed-wing Phoenix 2 imaging UAV

    Sentera LLC, a global provider of UAV hardware, sensors and data management platforms, has launched the Phoenix 2 fixed-wing unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). The Phoenix 2 is light-weight and highly durable, and can follow precise grid patterns.

    “The Phoenix 2 brings a level of precision and accuracy to UAVs that hasn’t been seen before,” said Todd Colten, chief aerospace engineer for Sentera. “Users can now collect highly detailed data quickly, and with complete certainty about its accuracy.” Colten went on to describe the professional-grade autopilot: “The grid pattern you specify is mapped pre-flight. The drone knows exactly what line to follow to get the exact looping radius, and the exact flight level needed for perfect tiling.”

    Sentera Phoenix 2.
    Sentera Phoenix 2.

    At only 4 pounds, the Phoenix 2 is easily hand-launched in just a few steps, and can carry multiple sensor options for up to an hour of flight time. The professional-grade autopilot is part of what makes the precision possible. It constantly auto-calculates and auto-optimizes according to the grid pattern specified to ensure the data collected meets exact specifications.

    “Growers are using the Phoenix 2 with agriculture-specific sensors to collect RGB, NIR, and NDVI imagery. That imagery is so precise – [the growers] tell us they’re targeting and treating specific parts of their fields, and then they’re using fewer chemicals, saving money and increasing yields,” continued Colten. “Follow-up flights can be programmed to use the same pattern for exact data comparison at multiple times throughout the growing season. We’re getting great feedback from our customers.”

    Attributes

    Payload Solutions: The Phoenix 2 is a highly-versatile UAV that accepts multiple sensors, including the Sentera Double 4K Sensor, providing true RGB and normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) data in a single flight. The Sentera Quad Sensor, a multi-spectral six-band imager with red edge capabilities is also popular in agriculture applications. Other compatible mapping sensors include the Sentera-Q for high-resolution orthomaps and the Radiometric Thermal Sensor, which quickly builds high-resolution true temperature maps. Sentera also offers EO and IR gimbaled payloads for live video public safety missions.

    Precision: Up to a 60-minute endurance and cruise speed of 30 mph, the Phoenix 2 is capable of covering broad areas that other UAVs of the same size cannot. The highly reliable and accurate Kestrel OnBoard autopilot ensure images are captured with precise, even spacing and overlap that is auto-calculated and can be adjusted by the user at the click of a button.

    Ease-of-Use: Effortlessly hand-launched in just a few steps, the 4-pound Phoenix 2 flies autonomously on a predetermined flight pattern that can be updated during flight by accessing the easy-to-use ground station software. Upon completion, the Phoenix 2 automatically returns to safely land.

    End-to-End Solution: The Phoenix 2 includes the aircraft, ground station, transportation cases, batteries, chargers, and software with multiple training options available. Sentera offers a wide variety of sensors, ensuring every application has the perfect imagery solution. Sentera’s AgVault and OnTop Open Software Platforms manage the multitude of images and data collected during flight, and allow near-real time reading and analysis of the data, including working with other data sources via APIs.